Converse says its popular Chuck Taylor sneakers have many distinctive marks. And it has taken to the courts to block other companies from selling shoes with a similar look.

But on Thursday, an international trade commission said that not all parts are protected by trademark, handing several major companies, including Walmart, a win.

The United States International Trade Commission barred any company from importing shoes that violated Converse’s trademark diamond-patterned outsole, long a part of the Chuck Taylor sneakers. That broad exclusion order goes beyond any one company, giving Converse protections against potential future knockoffs.

In a more consequential decision for the retailers still battling the company in the courts, however, the commission said that many other parts of the sneaker’s look — the rubber-toe band, toe cap and stripes — do not have the same protections. That means the retailers can continue to import and sell their shoes that look similar because their footwear does not have the diamond outsole.

“While we do not agree with all of the I.T.C.’s findings, we feel confident our rights will be vindicated on appeal,” said Brian Fogarty, senior director, global intellectual property litigation at Nike, which owns Converse. “This is but one step in a long process.”

Using its recognizable star and rubber-toe front, Converse was one of the first companies to fuel America’s obsession with athletic footwear as a fashion statement, paving the way for shoe companies like Nike, Reebok and Adidas. Since the introduction of its first sneaker, created for basketball players in 1917, Converse says it has sold more than a billion pairs of shoes with its trademark striped midsole worldwide.

The company even included photographs in its legal filings of “famous people” wearing its shoes — from Sylvester Stallone to Snoop Dogg to Michelle Obama.

“The broad appeal of the Converse midsole trademark is evidenced by its appearance in all walks of life,” said in court documents. “From the feet of a toddler taking her first steps to a celebrity on the red carpet.”

In October 2014, Converse took a two-pronged approach to try to protect the trademark on its Chuck Taylor All Stars: It sued 31 companies in 22 cases in the United States District Court in Brooklyn. Separately, the company also pursued a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission, which has the power to block products that are considered to be counterfeit from entering the country.

While Converse could be awarded monetary damages through its civil suits, an exclusion order from the trade commission offers sweeping protections against future counterfeiters. Converse would have been able to go after any products that violated its trademark designs, even if the companies behind them were not named in the original I.T.C. complaint.

“In some ways, it’s an almost perfect enforcement mechanism because if a good doesn’t get to come in the country, then it doesn’t get to be sold at all,” said R. Polk Wagner, a professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School who specializes in intellectual property.

But that large net scared the shoe company New Balance, which sued Converse in December 2014 in an attempt to invalidate some of the trademark features on the All Stars. The designs, New Balance argued, were too broad and would catch other shoes with similar styles — including, potentially, New Balance’s PF Flyers. Although New Balance was not named in the original litigation, the company worried it might be swept up in the flurry of litigation, including in the case before the I.T.C.

The ruling on Thursday means that Converse will be able to block any shoe that infringes on its diamond outsole from entering the country, creating a “huge headache for anybody trying to bring in these types of shoes, because customs does not have the ability to make decisions in this area quickly,” according to Susan K. Ross, a federal regulatory lawyer who is a partner at Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp, a law firm in Los Angeles.

The decision affirms some of the findings of an administrative law judge last November, but overrules the judge’s decision that the midsole was a valid trademark.

While the I.T.C. decision may not have a formal effect on the court cases, lawyers for both sides could use the commission’s decision to bolster their cases. Most of the 31 defendants in the Federal District Court case brought by Converse, including Kmart, have settled; only Walmart, Skechers and Highline United, which sells shoes under the Ash brand, remain.

Both sides can appeal the I.T.C. ruling. Highline United and New Balance could not be reached or did not respond to requests for comment.

In separate statements, both Walmart and Skechers said they were “pleased” with the trade commission’s decision.

“Walmart is an intellectual property owner and respects the intellectual property rights of others,” the company said.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page B2 of the New York edition with the headline: For Chuck Taylor, Sole Trademark Is Upheld. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe